Frajola v. Zanna
| Decision Date | 14 December 1934 |
| Docket Number | No. 29947.,29947. |
| Citation | 257 N.W. 660,193 Minn. 48 |
| Parties | FRAJOLA v. ZANNA. |
| Court | Minnesota Supreme Court |
Appeal from District Court, St. Louis County; Edward Freeman, Judge.
Election contest proceeding by Herman Frajola against Martin Zanna. The contest was dismissed, and the contestant appeals.
Affirmed.
Louis Sachs, of Minneapolis, and Mark Nolan and M. H. Greenberg, both of Eveleth, for appellant.
Ray Anderson, of Gilbert, and Carl H. Schuster, of Biwabik, for respondent.
Village election contest, involving the office of trustee of the village of Gilbert, St. Louis county, Minn. Contestee was declared elected by the village canvassing board. Contest proceedings were instituted and inspectors appointed. Returning all the ballots, they reported to the court that Zanna and Frajola had received, respectively, 589 and 591 uncontested votes; that there were forty-two contested ballots, two spoiled ballots, and one uncounted ballot. The ballots were nearly seventeen inches in length, and had thereon the names of twenty-one candidates. There were five offices to be filled. The court found that from the contested and the uncontested ballots contestee had received 604 and contestant 601 votes, and dismissed the contest.
The appeal calls in question the validity of six ballots, Exhibits 26, 28, 32, 34, 35, and 41, which appellant claims on their face were illegal and void.
On Exhibit 28 there were the words "Skver Deall O. K." at the very end of the ballot. Exhibit 41 contains the phrase "10 yrs" after the cross-mark made for a candidate for some other office. Appellant's theory is that these were identification marks. The words on Exhibit 28 were undoubtedly nothing more than an expression of the views of the voter that those for whom he voted represented to him a "square deal" and that they were "all right." The phrase on the other ballot referred to probably was not more than an expression of a hope that the candidate voted for might continue in office for a long period of time. This court has had occasion to pass on a somewhat similar matter. In Elwell v. Comstock, 99 Minn. 261, 109 N. W. 113, 698, 7 L. R. A. (N. S.) 621, 9 Ann. Cas. 270, it was held that neither the word "nit" nor the clause "May the best man win" was a label for the purpose of identification. In Truelsen v. Hugo, 81 Minn. 73, 83 N. W. 500, there was an expression of ill will after the name of the contestant. It was there held that such expression was not intended as a mark of identification. Adhering to the previous rulings of this court, we hold that the two ballots referred to were properly counted for contestee. See, also, Bloedel v. Cromwell, 104 Minn. 487, 116...
To continue reading
Request your trial